E.A.D.A. Jack McCoy
I knew it would come eventually so here goes. I obviously LOVE certain television shows… One on the top of my list is Law & Order. So 2 nights ago(I missed my usual lunch time viewing due to renovations in my house) I watched an episode where an animal rights protester broke into a lab where monkeys were being tested for an HIV vaccine and let a monkey with AIDS loose and it bit a lab worker who had an allergic reaction to the monkey’s saliva and died. This episode I’m sure would have tugged on the heart strings on animal lovers everywhere.
In watching this very intense episode Jack McCoy got me thinking. Should those who have a love for animals have a love for humans first and foremost? I’m interested in this discussion because its a great point that I personally can find myself standing on both sides of the line.
In this particular “case” I felt that the protester was wrong because he was given misguided information about the lab he was breaking into in order to “liberate” the spider monkeys. This lab was not mistreating the monkeys beyond caging them and injecting them with viruses for research (and before everyone gets up in a huff I do realize that to some people these are a “no no”and there is noway this can be right but please just hear me out). The activist also had no intention of hurting a human but in the court case Executive Assistant District Attorney Jack McCoy used as an argument (which is my point of this post) “Should we hold the rights of animals above humans” (in this case men, women and children who are infected with the AIDS virus)?
Should we stop using effective methods to save people from diseases and viruses to save an animals life? I realize that this post delves into the whole evolution/religion/human rights/animal rights territory and its a sticky place to be BUT I want to see if we can have an open, reasonable, friendly YET intelligent discussion about “Who should we put first man or beast?”
GO!
Follow me @koolmeg
Claire Gosse
I don't believe we should be testing on animals – a. because I don't believe we have the right to cage animals and test things on them that we wouldn't test on ourselves and b. because what works on an animal may not work on a human.I think if we're ever going to effectively cure diseases, we need to do more human testing.
Montel Williams is a big critic of animal testing and said “With all the technology we have we can reach the whole planet at the same time but we can't figure out how to cure a disease by poking people rather than poking animals? I don't get it.” Well put Montel!
My Corrie
Oh I agree with Montel partially… I believe that there should be a way for them to test on humans but they have yet to “discover” it for whatever reason…
I don't believe that animal testing is the absolute answer but at this stage in our “evolution” we don't have that option…
Like I said before I see and agree with both sides of the argument so DON'T shoot the messenger! 😉
Stevie P.
There's a surprising amount of data out there saying that testing without animals and using other methods is MUCH more effective but not as cost effective, so that's why they continue to do it. But I'm not a scientist so I can't confirm this information.
There's an interesting article regarding alternatives here: http://cfhs.ca/research/alternatives_to_animal_…
However, I won't dismiss all medical animal testing completely. It has helped us achieve a lot in terms of treatments and medicines, obviously to the benefit of humans primarily. I do think that the more that's done to minimize the need for it, the better.
In terms of testing for cosmetic things, like shampoos, makeups, etc…animals should never, ever be used. We've got the formula for soap down – there's no need for crazy advances that cause welts on our eyeballs upon usage.
My Corrie
Oh… I COMPLETELY agree about cosmetic testing I will PUT that on record for sure! I agree with you Steve how much more can we do with soap that has been around since 2800 BC…
I find the gray area is around finding cures for things like cancer and aids… but like you said I too am no scientist and know I could learn a lot more before taking a HARD stance!